User talk:Nathe

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search


Mass similar/duplicate uploads[edit]

Why? You could just upload a new version, without uploading a whole new file. - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 08:08, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I've tried that before and the image that displays doesn't show as the updated version, but the old one I wanted to overwrite. Feel free to have someone delete the duplicates though, I don't mind. --Nathe 08:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
It just takes sometime to update as the image cache can be rather slow sometimes.–User Balistic B d-dark.pngalistic 08:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh, okay. There was just a lot of trial and error I had to do to get the dimensions for the images right so that they would fit the boxes the way they were supposed to, is all. I think most of that's done now, though. --Nathe 08:22, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
You can also force images to a set pixel size in the user box without re-uploading the image at all. -Auron 08:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. :) --Nathe 08:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Any idea why the main wiki sidebar on this page is way down at the bottom and too small? I thought I did all the coding right, but any help would be appreciated. Thanks! --Nathe 09:24, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Sharkinu saves the day! - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 13:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Make sure to fix all open divs before you make the rest of your character pages. User Felix Omni Signature.pngelix Omni 13:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Yeah, it gets hard to keep track of the divs sometimes. --Nathe 19:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Though it seems like you have a naming system down, you can always look at this page to see what files you have uploaded under "User Nathe". G R E E N E R 19:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Done. --Nathe 20:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


It'd be nice, since your talk page is three times the maximum.--NeilUser Neil2250 sig icon6.png 20:27, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

That's fine, I'm just not sure how to do it. --Nathe 20:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Just copy the content to a page like User talk:Nathe/Archive. - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 20:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Then put
at the top of this one.--NeilUser Neil2250 sig icon6.png 20:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
And Voilà, done! - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 20:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


It's too bad that more than 50% of all people viewing your page will not get to see it without scrolling to the right. -- Wyn User Wynthyst sig icon2.png talk 01:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

What resolution should I work from, then? I have a widescreen monitor so that's why the pages are the way they are atm. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 02:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyright laws[edit]

As has been pointed out on Gaile's talk page, and implied before, please do not use this wiki as a means to promote your views on copy-right laws; Yours do not reflect the laws as they stand. Case in point, or the expanded suit. Even the transferring of an image between mediums without consent is a violation. So again, no more of this please. G R E E N E R 02:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

So just because something is a law, Greener, it can't be wrong? It can't be abused? I'm sorry you don't seem to understand that such things are possible and do happen. Copyright is subtraction, while sharing is addition. Nothing is created in a vacuum, and I'm sorry you don't appear to understand that. All works build on what came before, but if this is now forbidden via copyright law, how will culture survive? Fortunately, there are alternatives, such as Creative Commons and copyleft licenses. Not perfect, to be sure, but better than the way copyright is now.
By the way, are you aware that copyright supporters like the music and movie industries are behind the ACTA treaty and the COICA internet censorship bill (the latter of which, at least, has been supported by Anet's own Jeremy Soule), as well as the illegal takedowns of tens of thousands of websites by the ICE without any sort of due process? Is that really the kind of world you want to live in? Where third-party liability and mere accusation are valued more than due process and actual evidence? Copyright is regularly abused to stifle competition and has been extended well beyond any reasonable amount of time. It doesn't necessarily have to be abolished, but massive reform is very much necessary at the very least.
--Ranger Nathe 23:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
the biggest thing with this is that the article is that the artist didn't get permission to use the item and was making a profit off it. also he didn't give any credit to where he got it. Copyrights is a confussing subject at the best of of time. the best thing to do is look at your federal laws before you do anything that could be taken as a copyright issue. Ocren 01:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Normally I'd agree, but the problem is that the laws are largely skewed one way, in favor of more copyright and more controls, to benefit only copyright holders (which are often big businesses rather than individual creators) at the expense of everyone else. So because the laws are broken and regularly abused, they cannot be looked at without question. Even if someone else is profiting off your work, it's still an opportunity, because all you have to do is offer something the copyer can't, do what you do better, and compete better than they can. That's what happens in a free market.
Ranger Nathe 01:51, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Nathe, once again, do not start an argument with fallacious ad hominems; it only makes the reader avoid the rest of your paragraph. I gave you this advice earlier because I honestly meant well, and I'm still meaning well. G R E E N E R 03:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm not, Greener. If you actually look at the laws and follow the money trail, you'll find that most modern copyright laws have been and are being pushed by entertainment industry lobbyists with no regard for privacy rights or consumer rights. That's why you see things like DRM, domain takedowns without any form of due process, attempts at third-party liability, attempts to force ISPs to become copyright cops, tens of thousands of lawsuits by the RIAA against anyone they can accuse whether guilty or not (such suits have even been addressed to laser printers, grandmothers with no computers, dead people, and preteen children), attempts through treaties like ACTA to change a civil matter (infringement) into a criminal one, and the list goes on and on.
An IP czar (Espinel) in DC whose agenda is only about enforcement, not trying to honestly see whether the laws surrounding copyright are even doing what they are supposed to do. Hollywood studios and the major music labels are infamous for cooking their books, I shouldn't need to remind you of that, and their claims of losses have repeatedly been debunked over and over worldwide. For an example of a game whose creator has no concern over infringement and actually handles things rationally, see Minecraft. I've never played it, but I've heard a lot of good things about both the game and the creator behind it. Anet could learn a thing or two from him if they chose to. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 04:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
You could be right; you could be wrong. I honestly don't care either way. My warning is this - Guild Wars Wiki is a wiki about a video game. It isn't a place to bitch about copyright laws, RIAA, DRM or push your agenda and beliefs regarding any of the above topics. Said beliefs especially don't belong on ANet staff talk pages. This is your last warning. Don't do it again. -Auron 04:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I wouldn't have brought it up in the first place had it not been related to the original topic. How Anet responds to things like the incident described shows whether it as a company is trying to look forward or backward, and whether it really understands how much technology is changing things. It's sad that you don't care about the issue, because it involves not only the things above, but also privacy rights and due process, both of which have been trampled upon again and again in recent years. I'd rather Anet support those two things through how they conduct themselves and do business. I don't appreciate being censored, however, and I would appreciate being allowed to post that link back on her page so she can see my comment. I did it that way so that the comment itself would not have to be on her page since it's not wanted there, but could still be viewed. And Greener, I'd be interested in hearing your answers to the questions I asked above. Also, Auron, censorship is the tool of dictators, not human beings. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 04:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Anti-copyright from Gaile's page[edit]

moved from Feedback talk:Gaile Gray
I would advise you, Gaile, to think about how it will make Anet look to go after anyone using these images when no evidence of actual harm has been determined or provided. Instead, it would be more prudent, I think, to follow the example of Crytek when Crysis 2 leaked. They did not freak out and go legal. Instead, they smartly reached out to the fans and leakers with a positive response that while acknowledging that you might not approve of the use, you're glad they enjoy the game and its artwork so much and are committed to continuing to make a great game. See this story for Crytek's response to the Crysis 2 leak, as I mentioned above, for a better idea of what I mean. You don't want Anet to look petty and vindictive, but that's what will happen if you litigate over the use of a few images. It's not something you can really stop, so I'd suggest using it to your advantage rather than freaking out about it. And one other thing. Lawyers will always, more often than not, urge you to litigate because they won't make any money otherwise. So be wary when consulting with them, because their advice will almost always reflect that reality. --Nathe 22:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
What you describe is basically what ArenaNet did when Guild Wars 2's thief info was leaked - Anet decided to go with it (and allow other websites to release the info). This scenario is completely different. Crytek didn't have their artwork stolen by someone else's product. -- pling User Pling sig.png 22:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Pling, you can't steal something that's infinite. Anet still has their artwork. Copying is not theft. Please learn the difference between physical and digital goods. Otherwise you don't have much chance of thriving in a digital world. --Nathe 23:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
While plagiarism isn't the same as the theft of a physical good, that doesn't make it ethical or legal. The mere ability to make a digital copy of something doesn't give you the right to appropriate it as your own and try to make money off it without permission. --Valshia 00:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Nathe, nobody likes infinite. --NeilUser Neil2250 sig icon6.png 01:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Nathe, your example is an entirely different situation. Furthermore, you've already argued this point, and it was agreed upon that this is not the place to promote your anti-copyright ideals. --ஸ Kyoshi User Kyoshi sig2.png 01:12, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Neil, appreciate it. - Infinite - talk 02:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
@Nathe... Take your "everything digital is free" rhetoric somewhere else, and never bring it up here again.--Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg03:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry you don't seem to understand the fundamental nature of the internet, Lania. Or basic economics, apparently. When supply is infinite, and the cost of reproduction is zero or virtually zero, price will naturally gravitate to zero barring any artificial scarcities put in place. As I said, it's basic economics. Do some research if you don't believe me. And don't tell me what I can and can't talk about, please. This isn't a dictatorship, after all.
Valshia, you're right that plagiarism isn't right, but at the same time, no one has provided any concrete data showing that any empirical harm has been done by the lack of recompense to Anet. The abundance of information in a place like the internet makes copycats easy to spot, and so all they really end up doing is redirecting attention back to the source. So the damage is minimal, if existent at all. Copying is going to happen whether you want it to or not. Online, it's inevitable due to the very nature of the medium. Better to anticipate it and use it your advantage, as I said before, than freak out about it.
--Ranger Nathe 23:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
One last thing, I just want to clear up a misconception about what I said. I don't believe everything should be free. Just that a distinction should be made between scarce and infinite goods. One can use a free infinite good to sell scarce goods at a fair price. That's all I meant. But please try to understand that online, in the digital realm, one has no control over one's work. Because once something is online, it is everywhere. It is no longer scarce, but infinite. And therefore unable to be contained. It's just the reality of digital. Better to take advantage of that fact than panic about it. And no one is guaranteed an income. No one has the right to it. They only have the right to try. If they can't make it work, that's on them and they should do something else or adapt. Nina Paley, Paulo Coelho, and Cory Doctorow are all examples of creators making a living with their work without copyright. And there are many more. It's more doable than you think. But that's enough from me. I'll stop here. Sorry to have dragged this out on your page. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 03:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Nathe, you have two options. Either continue your "anti-copyright" crusade against the wishes of Gaile Grey the GWW community, alienate everyone, and risk a ban; or stop your crusade and try to be a constructive instead of a destructive member of the community. --Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg01:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with debating copyright law, just don't do it on Gaile's talk page. It's counterproductive and it clearly pisses her off. Also, good video. User Felix Omni Signature.pngelix Omni 02:06, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Topics that are controversial like religion and politics breed and attract trolls which generally leads to a shit storm. Discussions btw "anti-copyright" proponents vs "pro-copyright" proponents is always rather contentious irl. I'm not going to stop anyone from "debating" it but... yeah... --Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg02:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm not on any crusade, I just wanted to point out an alternate viewpoint. I didn't know it was wrong to have them. I was just giving her a bit of advice, and if you'll notice, I didn't mention copyright at all until the conversation was brought over here. I had taken care to be polite in my comments lately there and elsewhere, but I guess it wasn't seen. Even when I try to do things the right way, it's never acknowledged. Gaile hadn't yet responded to my comments, so how do you know how she felt about them, Felix? Just asking, not trying to argue. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 02:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
[1] --Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg02:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Just a few articles to get you guys thinking. It's an issue that affects more than you might realize. I just wanted to be sure Anet recognized this, rather than continuing to be stuck in the past and be unable or unwilling to adapt. That's not meant as an insult, by the way, just as an observation and opinion. I wish I didn't have to spell everything out, but I've been misunderstood here so many times I don't want to take any chances anymore. I'd read in particular the article about the "stolen" scream, since it, like the incident which sparked this, involves the unauthorized use of someone's image, but with a totally different reaction by the originator of that image. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 06:31, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
"And don't tell me what I can and can't talk about, please. This isn't a dictatorship, after all."
thanks, life was getting pretty suck. -- ArmondUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 07:42, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
So you don't like allowing alternative views then, Armond? And on my talk page, I can choose what I talk about and don't talk about. I wouldn't disagree that this place sometimes feels like a dictatorship, though. Sometimes I wonder if the typical admin/nonadmin structure is really all that good. Perhaps a different approach would be better, but I doubt anyone would ever try it. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 09:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Please, please, please tell me you're going to stop telling us to wake up and recognize that copyright is bad in order to lecture us on the theoretical negatives of dictatorship (preferably while focusing on the connotation instead of denotation, socially accepted implications, spoon-fed mindset provided by many public education systems, and popular but cutely irrelevant historical failures). It would make my day. Although, if you don't, I've at least gotten some amusement out of your implications that allowing alternate viewpoints is at all related to dictatorship and that you have freedom of speech on the internet. In fairness, however, I agree that the sysop/normal user structure is less than ideal. -- ArmondUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 09:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I shouldn't have to tell you what should be plainly obvious (about copyright, that is)—what good will the rights to GW, for example, do anyone in a hundred years when it will finally enter the public domain? Did you even know that copyright currently lasts 70 years plus the life of the author/creator? Consider that many of the "creators" are in fact companies, and you find that many works will never enter the public domain because of this, since companies almost never legally die. And yes, you do in fact have free speech online, because you can always find a place to post what you want to say, and so there is always a way for you to be heard. Read the articles I listed above if you'd like to learn more about what copyright is really like and what some people are doing apart from it to make a decent living from their work. At the very least, copyright needs to be radically scaled back, at least to the original Constitutional duration of 14 years with one 14 year extension. And restored to being opt-in instead of opt-out. As for this place, I was merely commenting that admins here, at least, don't seem to like differing ideas. They seem to want everyone to think the same way and never question anything. At least that's my observation. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 09:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I think since Gaile posted here I don't need to find the other time she responded less than favorably to your opinions. Also, I'm more of an opponent of DRM than copyright law in general. User Felix Omni Signature.pngelix Omni 14:34, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
FYI, I am generally a supporter of the copyleft movement, so I am aware of the issues... but there is a time and a place for everything. If I'm making an icon that I want anyone to do whatever they want with it then I'll release it under the public domain and forfeit all copyrights. If my work is non viable as a consumer product and I want anyone to copy it then I'll release it under the creative commons attribution license or CC-BY. If my work is commercially viable but I want to freely share it, I'll use the CC-BY-NC-ND license. If I want to allow derivative works then I'll use CC-BY-NC. If I'm writing a manual or technical document to be shared, then I'll use GFDL or CC-BY-SA. If I don't want to share it then I'll use traditional copyright. The whole point of the copyleft movement is to give artists more flexibility on how they want to release their work and not be constrained by a single monolithic copyright law. What Anet wants to do with their work is up to Anet, and you preaching your blanket anti-copyright views to Gaile and Anet isn't any better than the RIAA/MPAA stating a blanket proclamation that the free movement will kill the art industry. --Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg15:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I never meant for it to come across that way, I was only trying to make her aware that other options exist and that they shouldn't be ignored. Doing so is a risk in this day and age with the way technology is rapidly making the old ways of doing business obsolete. And I'm not against all copyright, if it were to be radically scaled back to its original Constitutional limits at the very least and returned to opt-in instead of opt-out. I just think it's gone too far, is all. Also, that attempts at enforcement in the digital realm often backfire because those who try often don't understand what they're dealing with and why it happens. Or what's called the "Streisand Effect," which basically means that the more you try to stifle something, the more attention it actually gets. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 18:31, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


You should upload a duplicate of the icon you're using right now for your personal use only, since right now your signature is basically linking to the Ranger article. I think that's in GWW:SIGN somewhere. User Felix Omni Signature.pngelix Omni 02:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, will do. Ranger Nathe 02:23, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

From Gaile's page[edit]

One last thing, I just want to clear up a misconception about what I said. I don't believe everything should be free. Just that a distinction should be made between scarce and infinite goods. One can use a free infinite good to sell scarce goods at a fair price. That's all I meant. But please try to understand that online, in the digital realm, one has no control over one's work. Because once something is online, it is everywhere. It is no longer scarce, but infinite. And therefore unable to be contained. It's just the reality of digital. Better to take advantage of that fact than panic about it. And no one is guaranteed an income. No one has the right to it. They only have the right to try. If they can't make it work, that's on them and they should do something else or adapt. Nina Paley, Paulo Coelho, and Cory Doctorow are all examples of creators making a living with their work without copyright. And there are many more. It's more doable than you think. But that's enough from me. I'll stop here. Sorry to have dragged this out on your page. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 03:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

To this notorious suggestor:[edit]

Please don't clutter the pve feedback with your skillbalance ideas. --Boro 10px‎ 08:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Clutter? How is two suggestions clutter? I thought the whole point of the feedback space was for us to put our suggestions there. If not there, where? User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 09:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Boro, where? Looking at Nathe's contributions, i see no clutter. - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 09:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
He's just trolling, Nathe. Stop it, boro. -Auron 11:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Yeah sorry. I kinda overreacted that ranger spirit activation post, maybe because I know how Nathe loves to write suggestions. Still, this is for the future because when one visits PvE feedback ("For suggestions about Player versus Environment gameplay and its components: quests, missions and the enemies fought in them in Guild Wars."), he doesn't expect skill balance ideas to be there, and it can confuse him to see little tidbits (or full-scale essays) surrounded and interpolated with stuff like "Vital Weapon needs a buff and such". Again I know it wasn't you, but even that one Ranger Activation thingy can be a little disruptive when the expected suggestions are about areas, whole quest lines, missions and elite missions and general PvE-ing. --Boro 10px‎ 11:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Technically, skills are part of PvE, so it's not in the wrong place. I just put it in the category I thought was appropriate. It's also in the Skills category, though. Sorry if that threw you off. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 12:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

"You don't know the future, so please don't try to predict it."[edit]

You do realize how silly that statement is, right? Rational decision-making relies on attempting to predict the outcome of our actions. If it didn't, we'd all be waving our dicks in the air and curing cancer. User Felix Omni Signature.pngelix Omni 01:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but also by not automatically assuming your predictions are always right. Yet here, I don't think I've seen any allowance for error in such predictions. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 16:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
That "error" has already been made when it was much easier to send in suggestions and get feedback. It was as many have said by people who were here at the time... a nightmare to manage. So in this case, no prediction is necessary. --Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg17:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Alright. I just don't like just giving up without trying anything though. That's all. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 17:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
It's a good thing to never give up. But it's also important to pick and choose your battles to see if its worth fighting or not. Even if I don't think all cancers can be cured in our life time, it's still a battle worth fighting. In contrast, even if I have an argument with my SO, most times its better to drop it even though I know I am right. --Lania User Lania Elderfire pinkribbon.jpg18:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

A question[edit]

moved from Feedback_talk:John_Stumme#A question

I was thinking about last year's Pink Day that GW had for breast cancer, and I was wondering if a similar thing might be able to be done sometime for autism. Blue Day, similar to Pink Day and with a special blue dye (closer to cyan, maybe, I don't know) available for sale in-game like the pink dye that was made available on Pink Day. And fundraisers like Pink Day had, as I recall. It's a pretty widespread condition—my son has it, as a matter of fact—and increasing awareness of it couldn't hurt. Just whenever you think you might be able to fit in in between whatever else you're doing. If this should go in the feedback space, then that's fine, I'll move it there. I just wasn't sure if it should because it isn't really a suggestion for the game itself, just a thought for a unique event similar to another we've had. But whatever you think is best. Thanks! User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 01:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

i think why pink day had a day in game is because there is a actual pink day here in the states, i also think that its because someone put in the time to organize a event in game for it. i think if you organized a event for blue day or whatever and then said hey i organized this event can we get a dye added to the game?-User Zesbeer sig.png Zesbeer 02:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Once again, I need to point out that this is a suggestion that more properly belongs in the Suggestion area. I do happen to agree with Zesbeer that Anet's contribution to this event was secondary to the massive effort of User:Roflmonkrofl and others from the community. -- Wyn User Wynthyst sig icon2.png talk 22:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
On that subject, there is a substantial subset of the autistic community that thinks "freak pride" parades are stupid, and that it's easier dealing with people being ignorant than dealing with people with absurdly inaccurate misconceptions brought about by crappy advertising campaigns. If you really want to do us a favor, bring back dye remover. –Jette 00:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Now that there's (some sort of) magenta, all that's left is cyan to have a CMYK color space. Since dyes seem to follow a subtractive color model instead an additive one, having Cyan would complete a CMYK color set, and that should allow more accurate mixes. I don't need some real-world even excuse to see that. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 15:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
My son is Autistic too, and the idea is a good one if there's a way to get it to direct funds to research about autism. However I also acknowledge that the more events like this that happen the more special interest groups have to get involved and acknowledged. We avoid the real life by coming to these games. GW isn't where I go to learn more about autism, it's where I go to have a break from the pressure of being the mother of an autistic child and other stress causing life issues. So the question becomes where to draw the line, because then you have other valid causes looking to get their time in the sun. You have MS and Parkinson's, animal rights and environmental issues, and then of course there's even Japan disaster relief. I agree this isn't necessarily where this should be discussed as far as suggestions go, and I don't feel that Guild Wars in general should be used as a platform for real life issues because it opens up too many doors to too many places. Alcyone 15:58, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
No, nobody gives a damn about awkward social rejects with half a brain. A charr gay pride festival tops this on every point, that'd be something I'd embrace with all my heart. GW2 material, probably. Guys, rainbow dye! Now we're talking business. :D -Cursed Angel 熱 16:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
"No, nobody gives a damn about awkward social rejects with half a brain." Are you talking about yourself? Otherwise, that was very insensitive. --talk Large 16:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, Wyn. I'll withdraw it for now, since I didn't realize that Pink Day wasn't something Anet initiated, so that being the case, they wouldn't by themselves start another such event, I don't think. So it wouldn't be the Live Team's domain. And I can understand Alcyone's point, too, though as Large pointed out, CA's was quite inappropriate. I was going to say you could archive this if you like, but I found I was typing my post right as it was moved here. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 16:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah Pink day is just a part of the breast cancer awareness month. There are also races and other events that occur around the states. For further reading [2]. Last year a part of the half time show for the boise state broncos football game in october against was about breast cancer, and most people were wearing pink shirts, and waving pink pom poms at half time. But many events for breast cancer do frequently occur at different times of the year, especially races and marathons.

We do read feedback...[edit]

It will probably be a week before I have something worthwhile to show, but in the meantime: I did something similar for stuff that Gaile has to repeat all the time on her talk page (I just copy and paste). User:Tennessee Ernie Ford/Gaile sez. It has the verbatim quotes and links to the relevant edit(s) that added them to the wiki.

Would something like that work?  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds good. Thanks! User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 22:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Well done![edit]

moved from Feedback talk:John Stumme#Well_done!
And again I've been misunderstood by those who rush in with assumptions rather than simply asking me for clarification. I don't feel Anet is obliged to do anything except do their very best with any content they put out. And I'm not sure they did that here, that's all. When I spoke of taking a risk, I meant in adding more people to the Live Team even though it might not seem necessary. Anet's being cheap by only allowing them to have the minimum number of people possible because they're so obsessed with GW2 they seem not to care as much about the quality of stuff being made for GW1. And for the record, it is possible to make money and art without copyright (which is constantly being abused these days by many as a bludgeon to take away our constitutional rights). People do it all the time. But that's a discussion for elsewhere. We can have it on my talk page, if you like. Anyway, I'm just saying Anet could have done better with WoC than just mindless difficulty increases and underwhelming rewards—every other endgame weapon set is either green or gold, so why are these purple? They couldn't be bothered to make them gold? Or even give them some new skins? This is what I mean when I say cheap - they couldn't be bothered to spend the time and effort to make it right, they just threw it out there. And late, as well. This was supposed to start months ago. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 13:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
If they didn't care about GW1, updates would have stopped, and there would be no live team. Just a small QA composed with one QA guy that fixes bugs, and they would still be using that inefficient NCSoft support system instead coming up with the support forum, if anything at all. Remember that this game has no fees, and NCSoft is a whole owner of ANet. I doubt they are swimming in money as you seem to think. As for the skins, they are purple because they are not final rewards, look at the NPC with the imperial guard costume. See the weapons he carries? Those are new, those will probably be the gold ones. The purple color has always been extremely underused. I think more crafters and collectors with special (but not prestige) weapons should give them purple instead gold. For example, at least one crafter in The Jade Sea should have a complete inscribable purple Jade set, and one in Echovald should have a complete inscribable purple Gothic/Amber set to craft. And if you want a gold one, you still need to get it from the current sources for gold inscribables Factions skins: elite missions and the Zaishen chest. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 13:49, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
I know NCSoft and Anet aren't swimming in money - another unfounded assumption on your part. Yet they could risk a little capital to do a bit more than they have been so far instead of being minimalist about it. I will say again - WoC is late, by many months, and the quests that I've done so far (just finished the one at Minister Cho's estate) are pretty much just spins on "let's just slap on more artificial difficulty, drag them out for as long as possible, and make it as frustrating as possible unless you use the meta gimmick builds like the myriad -way builds people seem to slobber over." The motto for playing WoC should be - "Death is certain." As for skins, most people want greens or golds, not blues or purples. This is just Anet ignoring what players want and trying to force on them what Anet thinks they should want. That's not how you earn loyalty from your players. Also, since we have no way of knowing yet how many items will be needed to trade for the Imperial set that may be coming, how can we be sure we'll have enough left over after getting a purple from this set to get a weapon from the Imperial set as well? User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 16:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
No it's not - this is you being ignorant.
If you suck at the game, yeah, you're going to fail. The content isn't designed around "did the players bring the best heroes in the game and abuse the most powerful mechanics in the game", it's designed around "can the players put together a decently synergistic team build and play smart". If you put together a team with the worst heroes in the game or use builds with bad elites, you're going to struggle. That's not bad design; that's just a level of difficulty that requires a modicum of skill to overcome.
You're right, we don't know how many commendations we'll need for the Imperial weapons. If you buy the purity weapons now, you may not have enough for an Imperial weapon later. This is a life lesson; if you insist on having your marshmellow now, you're going to run into problems. Patience is, in fact, a virtue. (Besides, who says you need to get a purity weapon, or even an imperial weapon?)
I don't see why you insist that they could "risk a little capital to do a bit more than they have so far" - that's not a risk, it's a waste. Guild Wars' income is pathetic compared to the cost; they have hundreds of servers, hundreds of employees, and an overarching goal that is honestly staggering to consider. How many parent companies would allow ANet to jump on GW2 after all the criticism they've taken since the release of Nightfall (or even Factions)? How many parent companies are ok with releasing non-subscription based games? How many parent companies wouldn't put their foot down at four years of development and its associated costs without even a public beta? According to wikipedia, ANet has ~270 employees; let's say they're salaried 50k/year, on average (and that's probably conservative); that's 54 million dollars that have been put into GW2 so far, with no sign of a beta or release... and you want them to just drop that, even a small part of it, for WoC, which will pull in perhaps a few hundred thousand dollars? Without any sort of subscription or guaranteed income? NCSoft laughs at your puny understanding of business.
I agree the quests (from my current experience) aren't as well designed as, say, the Wrathgate quests in WoW, but for a skeleton crew, it's an impressive production - and let me remind you that you paid nothing for this, which can't be emphasized enough. A lot of experienced players enjoy the difficulty; it's a step up from normal mode, a step down from elite areas, and it matches the trend started in WiK. I don't see how any of the difficulty is artificial; artificial difficulty is when you fight enemies twice your level, or find an area that's identical to a previous one but with twice the stats on the enemies, or are otherwise presented with challenges that require your skill level to jump from "excellent" to "Korean". This is valid difficulty; enemies use different skills, and more importantly enemies use a variety of skills, which (theoretically) means you need to be able to adapt to different strategies and group compositions. All in all, it's a difficulty designed around an aged game with experienced players - although as you and others are proving, experienced doesn't necessarily mean skilled.
Do you have a quote somewhere that says "Winds of Change will be out in march/april/may/whenever"? You keep saying it's late, but you don't provide any evidence whatsoever.
I remind you that this is part one of three of a free mini-expansion. Before you judge the content as a whole, perhaps you should wait for it to be available as a whole.
-- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 19:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
I make no unfounded assumptions. You mentioned that they don't use enough money for this, yet they use as much as they can. GW2 is probably costing quite some. Full voice localization is one of the most expensive parts of a game, yet they recorded lots and lots of it, to the point that even they have random banter for all enemies that talk, and you'll probably hear those only when going invisible or spying from behind a corner. They are probably spending as much as they can in GW1 already. If you think they can spend much more, then either you don't take into consideration all things, or you think they swim in money. As for people wanting green and gold, you can't always give players what they want. If every monster you kill gave one black dye, one gold weapon, one elite tome and one ecto, one ruby and one sapphire, many players would be getting what they want, but I don't need to tell you why that should not be done. Currently color in weapons is meaningless, and it only has a small effect in foci (6 or 3 energy when the requirement is not met depends on rarity). So the purple color just shows that those weapons are not extremely rare, just uncommon. Since the ministry armed many citizens of Kaineng, you can't say those weapons are rare, but since they where made by just one armorer and you can obtain them only by helping the ministry, they are uncommon. You don't notice its meaning because, as I said before, the purple color is extremely underused. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 13:14, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Armond, I never said drop any of the costs for GW2, simply spend a little more to have more people on the Live Team. More people on the team means bigger content. And bigger content means more monetizing opportunities. GW1 shouldn't be all but ignored just because GW2 might be coming out by the end of the decade. And I resent the implication that I'm not skilled. I've finished all the campaigns and WiK, many multiple times, with multiple characters of different professions, all with builds I put together myself on my own. I don't use pvx, I don't use -way builds. I've done most of the dungeons with my guild and alliance and never had problems with most of them. So drop your arrogance and your thinking that only you know what skilled means. You don't. And if Anet were truly listening to everyone, they would have made the content less difficult because not everyone shouts the "harder! harder!" mantra that masochists like you do. Content can be enjoyable without being made to be more difficult. Simply dropping HM level enemies in NM is not the way to do things. And I recall John saying last year that WoC was to begin earlier this year and would be spread across the whole year, not just half of it.
Mith, I wasn't talking about money used on GW2, but on GW1. They devote only the barest resources to it, yet more could be done and more money could be made if they put more into it. Not everyone is going to migrate to GW2, after all. And if you want to keep your players happy and loyal, you listen to them instead of ignore them. Without them, you have no business and no income. If it's gold weapon sets people want, make those available. Availability doesn't mean being common, rather just being possible to get. People want ectos, tomes, etc. and they are available. Rare yes, but available and obtainable. Anet answers that demand in the right way, so why not this? User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 16:35, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
So your suggestion is to hire more people, because you aren't satisfied with the additional free content they're providing? I honestly can't tell if you're serious about that. They aren't exactly making a lot of money off this. As for the difficulty-it's exactly where it should be. Guild Wars is not a new game. And because of how builds work, the entire playerbase is constantly becoming more effective. With heroes and pve skills, the game has gone from normal missions being fairly challenging to HM being only rarely difficult. That's why there are areas such as DoA which are explicitly stated to be intentionally hard, even for well designed and experienced teams. The WoC content is not that difficult in NM, it's just harder than some of the previous content because it's designed with the assumption that anyone going through it already knows how to play, which is entirely reasonable. Complaining about the level of the enemies makes no sense at all. To even start WoC, you must complete Factions. Which means you have already fought level 28 enemies in NM. WoC has lower level enemies than the missions at the end of campaigns, so how is their level too high for a post-campaign chain? What they did was give them good builds, which is the proper way to add challenge. If enemies are hard because they have a wide variety of abilities, that's proper difficulty. If you want to complain about something for levels, how about the HM titan quests? Level 40 enemies that simply kill you with overwhelming force. THAT is fake difficulty, WoC is just asking players to be better and smarter, instead of just c-spacing through pve like usual.
In HM, some of it is a significant challenge, but it's not impossible, and that's exactly what HM is supposed to be. Nothing required, just extra challenge for those that want it. I've done the entire HM chain with heroes, and so have many people I know. And the best part is that every single one I've talked to has used different tactics. Different classes, builds and strategies. WoC isn't forcing use of cookie-cutter play, just of good play and creativity. For example-one of the hardest quests is the Haiju Lagoon one in HM. After failing several times with normal tactics, I completed it by using minions to keep the npc moving, so we didn't have to deal with all of the aggro at once. My guild leader dropped all offensive power from his party and held position with heals and prots until the timer was out. Another friend used a shadowform tank to hold some of the aggro for long enough that the heroes could deal with the rest. If you try it with conventional tactics, it's nearly impossible, but clever play allows you to win, which is exactly the way HM should be. If you personally are having difficulty, that absolutely does not mean that the quests are too hard, just that they aren't doable for the way you're playing. I've never played with you in game, so I won't pretend to know how good you are, I'll just say to try adapting to the fights rather than just giving up and complaining when your usual tactics fail.
And finally, about the weapons. This is part 1 of 3. I don't think you are understanding that point. Gold weapons are coming, and they will be the new skins. You can see the sword and shield already, and they look great, in my opinion. There's a very good chance they will be able to be added to the HoM. We'll probably also see greens, a new hero, and who knows what else. The current ones, in the context of the game, are mass produced weapons intended to be given to as many people as possible. The NPC that gives them to you says this pretty clearly. They're nothing new, but most of them are nice skins, and several were difficult to acquire previously. Also, there is absolutely no functional difference between a purple and a gold. Seriously, none at all. All the color does here is to distinguish them from the next set. Now go and enjoy your free content updates. I know I am. ¬ «Ðêjh» (talk) 18:16, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
You really don't realize how much bigger WoC could have been had more people been available to work on it, do you? That's all I meant. My other point was that there are other ways to make content interesting besides making it difficult, that's all. It doesn't have to be hard to be fun. Not everyone wants to play that way. And why would they offer skins now and let people waste their items on them when another set is coming down the line and people would have already spent their items on the first set, leaving them unable to get the second set at all? It doesn't make sense. I like the idea of the content, I just think they should have made it a tad less difficult, is all. And those level 28 enemies are only in a certain part of NM, they don't populate it in general. Enemies of that level should be rare in NM, not standard. HM is where the challenge should be, not NM. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 14:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Your arguments make a nonsense of the regulations!
How big is WoC, exactly? What does part three entail? Until you can answer that, you really don't have room to complain. Of course it could be bigger; they could have made a entirely new game out if the concept, one with two expansions and corresponding costs (to both the manufacturer and the consumer). But they did this for free; if you want amazing quality, you have to pay for it. That's how the world works. And the truth is that a lot of people don't; if it cost $10 to unlock WoC, very few people would buy it.
They offer new skins now because they can, pretty much; as has been mentioned, no one's forcing you to buy them, and they're nowhere near required for a first part of a mini-expansion. It's also pretty obvious that there's more skins to come, and thus a future use for commendations. If you use all yours on weapons of purity and for some reason can't earn enough in the next two parts for the stuff you want, tough! You can buy them from other players, or reroll new factions characters and get more. I don't see how giving players options is a bad thing.
The average level of normal mode monsters is something around 12 or 14, thanks to Prophesies. Beyond that, WoC is the minority of content, just like endgame factions. It's new, but that doesn't mean it's magically more populous than the three campaigns and expansion that preceded it. If you want "fun but not hard", go back to Vizunah - and let me know how many people you find there (hint: not many, because humans are generally entertained by challenges). Also, surprise - the afflicted are level 26, which makes them even easier than normal mode.
I hate implicating things, by the way, so no, I was not implicating that you're unskilled. Your listed accomplishments are quite easy and prove nothing; furthermore, no one cares about originality since the normal mode campaigns are doable with full henchmen and an empty skill bar.
Furthermore, your claims have been devoid of proof thus far. You claim WoC is late, but can't find a source; you say high level enemies should be left to hard mode, but can't cite any credible reason why; you keep going on about how WoC could be bigger, but you started saying that before you even completed part one; you complain about "what people want" without presenting any research but your own opinions; and you claim people will run out of commendations before imperial weapons become available without any data on people's current spending habits, the rewards of parts two and three, or the cost of said weapons. In short, your arugments are laughably void of credibility. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 15:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Leaning towards him being a troll at this point. ¬ «Ðêjh» (talk) 16:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Disagreement = trolling? Nice judgementalism, Dejh. As for how big WoC will be, it doesn't matter, because it could have been bigger had more people been available. And don't tell me there is no amazing content for free - Creative Commons and the public domain would argue with you there. Paid does not always equal better quality. You say I have no proof of my claims, but you don't provide any proof for your claim that the campaigns can be done with an empty skill bar and just henches. How do you get through the Realm of Torment, then? How do you beat Shiro without using any skills of your own? I don't know what other things can be done in the game besides the campaigns and the dungeons, and I've done plenty of HM content without much trouble. I may have been wrong about WoC being late, but you've not given any proof that it's on time, either. The Afflicted would be easier than NM if they used the same builds as in NM, but they don't. So that argument doesn't fly. And the purple skins aren't new, they're reused. And when I said "fun but not hard," by hard I meant frustration-causing hard. For example, of late I've been attempting to get through Frost Gate HM but haven't succeeded yet. It's fairly tough but I know what I did wrong in my losses and I know they happened because of those mistakes, not because of the enemies being too hard. I've gotten the bonus and I'm sure I'll get the mission on my next attempt. That sort of difficulty I don't mind. But with WoC, like the Shenzun Tunnels quest where you have to fend off an insanely huge mob of high-level Afflicted with no hint of how you're supposed to do it, it's more frustrating and less fun. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 15:23, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
You seem to have misunderstood. The implication that you're trolling is preferable to the alternative, and has no connection to disagreement. It's because if you're not trolling, it means you're acting extremely childish. If you are having trouble with content other people are not, the solution is not to complain about the difficulty. The correct response here would be to ask the other players what has worked for them, and try that. Asking ANet to readjust this content to fit you personally is the wrong way to go about it, and shows an inflated sense of entitlement. For example: if you had difficulty with Shenzun Tunnels, try this strategy. The enemies come from different directions, so just fight the groups which come from the ramp nearest the npcs, and pull the other groups around the corner when you're ready. Controls aggro and balls up the enemies easily. If you mess something up, just rez at the shrine and try again. Works in normal and hard mode. There are strategies which work for every one of the WoC quests, and if you can't figure them out yourself, there's no shame in asking. Keep in mind, any time spent reworking the current content means less time to work on the new.
Now for your other points. GW isn't Creative Commons. There's a lot of great free stuff, but there's even more which are worth what you pay for them. ANet is paying a small group to work on new content which they are making no money off of, and they've done pretty well for what they're working with. The afflicted have better skill bars than normal enemies, which is why they are lower level than endgame enemies. That's a better way to add difficulty: give the enemies less of an advantage in raw power, but give them flexible builds which take at least some thought to counter. We all know the purples aren't new skins, he obviously meant new weapons. Pretty sure the wand and offhand skins were never available as that item type before though. And I'm fairly sure the 'empty skill bar and full henchmen' thing has been done by a few people, but I've never done it personally, so can't really comment there, but don't forget that henchmen get celestial skills vs Shiro, most of the Realm of Torment isn't that hard, and NF henchmen have decent bars. ¬ «Ðêjh» (talk) 17:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Why do you assume that just because you haven't had trouble with the new content, no one else has? Neither of us is unique in our experiences with it. For some it gives trouble and is hard, for others not. Don't deny that it can do this. And technically, it's not possible to finish all the missions in Proph with an empty skill bar, because the Ascension mission is a solo mission and it would be very difficult to beat it without any skills. Whenever I've fought Shiro, the henches have never used their celestial skills very well. And don't forget that he can banish them, and does so constantly. And to Armond, as for EotN - tell me how people kill Cyndr without a skillbar. Tell me how they kill the Great Destroyer without a skillbar or any means of avoiding burning. Tell me how they get through WiK without a skillbar. Sorry, but you're clearly exaggerating. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 17:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
I didn't say no one else had trouble. In fact, I'm sure that many people find it difficult. There's plenty of earlier content people have trouble with too. That doesn't mean any of it is too hard, just that they're going about it the wrong way. Asking the game to change because you have trouble, instead of adapting to the changes in the game, is fairly ridiculous. For any mission, there are nearly infinite ways to do something wrong. If I try to do missions with my awesome mending wammo team, and fail, it doesn't mean the missions were too hard, it means I was playing badly. As I've said before, I know a lot of people who have completed WoC with heroes in NM and HM, using a wide variety of builds and tactics. There's lots of ways to win-if whatever you tried didn't work, it doesn't mean nothing works, it just means you were going about it the wrong way. ¬ «Ðêjh» (talk) 18:07, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Cyndr is fucking easy - on a normal attempt, you drop a keg and the heroes kill her before she regenerates her shell. With an empty skill bar, the harder part would be getting to her, since there's a bunch of fire eles and you're not allowed Technobabble. Also, Augury Rock is an obvious exception and you make yourself look like an asshole for pointing it out. Not gonna respond to anything else right now because reading your train of thought is super depressing and I have to go to work; might get to it later. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 19:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I like cards. This is my favourite card. 17:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

How about Cowardice, IP? Too scared to even leave your name? And Dejh, I understand what you mean. But what happens when more people have trouble with content than are able to get through it? What then? I do adapt my tactics when needed, I'm just saying that Anet shouldn't always resort to pumping the difficulty as the only way to make content interesting, that's all. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 18:50, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

IPs reveal less than usernames, right? Are you so arrogant as to believe that anyone worth contributing anything must go to the effort of creating an account - even if they're only going to make a few edits?
If there's more people having trouble with content than there are people clearing it, that just means it's a normal update. News flash - MMO communities suck, and most players are terrible at game. Partially because of this, and partially because of how the world works, one does not have the right to experience new content just because the new content exists; one earns that right by being a good enough player to clear the content. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 19:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
This is what happens when enough people whine about the difficulty. But after the 7-hero update, I doubt they'll really need to adjust this. If they do, it'd probably only be a very minor change. Mora 19:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Where are your stats and figures to support your claim that most players are bad ones? You harp on me for not having any proof yet you provide none yourself for your own claims. Hypocrite. And as for the IP, I was just saying that if he's going to snipe, he should put a name behind it if he has any belief in it at all. As for difficulty in general, why do you two get to decide what the right level of it is? Stop being such an elitist, Armond, and accept that there are those who play differently from you and thus will have different experiences in the game. Put no one down, for any reason, lest you be put down yourself. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 19:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I think Mora makes a good point about the 7 heroes - the reason that the rest of the game is comparatively easy is because it was designed with 3 heroes, or even no heroes in mind. It's not that WoC is super hard, it's just the rest of the game has been made easy by 7 heroes, consumables, skill rebalances ruining mob skill bars, and PvE skills. WoC isn't harder at release than any other content that ANet has put out, it just has better mob skill bars and more enemies to compensate for the better tools that players have compared to what they have previously had. Don't you remember doing Gate of Madness a week after NF came out? Flame Djinns with the original SF? Trying to do the Eternal Grove with henchmen?
Also, you need to be thinking about GWW:NPA before calling people cowards, hypocrites and elitists. Not all playstyles are equal - someone who has taken a 7-hero team off PvX is obviously going to perform better than someone running hamstorm or echo mending. If ANet wanted to accommodate for all playstyles the game would have no difficulty whatsoever. Lastly, one thing you need to remember before being a dick on the wiki liason's page is that continued interaction with the community at this late point in the game's life cycle is one of the things that makes ANet great. Don't throw it back in their faces. --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Damnit everyone, this section is just getting huge and volatile. So, everyone stop. No-one's gonna convince anyone. --JonTheMon 19:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Augury Rock and etc[edit]

A little late to the party, but it's entirely possible to beat that mission with an empty skillbar. Just go in with a max martial weapon, max armor, possibly a shield, and 12 in the proper attributes. This works regardless of class (e.g. Monk/Warrior is okay), and it also works regardless of the weapon, as long as it's not a wand/staff. Try it for yourself; I successfully tested it on all of my characters, anyway.

Shiro in Factions can be beat with all henchmen and an empty skillbar if you're lucky. It just depends on the timing of the celestial skills. Celestial Storm, Storm of Swords, and Star Strike all at once more or less kills him. Shiro in Nightfall is another matter entierly, and I don't know if that would be possible. The only useful skill any of the henchmen would have is Odurra's Empathy, and I don't think that would be enough.

P.S. Did you notice how I'm signed in to avoid any unnecessary ad hominems? Vili 点 User talk:Vili 01:37, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You don't have to resort to low blows, you know. And the blank skillbar approach is more of a gimmick than anything else, not really something worth boasting about. What do I have to do to show I'm skilled? Solo Dhuum? Just drop it already. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 02:45, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
so low blows are only okay if ur making them? and normal mode being completable with empty skill bars dont mean gw pve is a joke? go play in champ range or something, get yourself some g6, or at least stop crying about gw pve requiring you to think about wat ur doing 19:14, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Super Igor was at least funny. 20:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
As Jon said above, drop the conversation. I've blocked the two IPs for trolling, and will continue to do so if this continues. --Rainith 20:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Alright, fair enough, Rainith. Sorry it went so far. User Nathe iconR.png Nathe 22:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Random promotion of ACD[edit]

Stop it. Also hiding behind an IP is a bad idea. --File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.pngChieftain Alex 16:07, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

So you answer an attempt to raise awareness of censorship by censoring it? Obviously your loyalties are now clear.
As much as I may agree with the cause, there is no excuse to spam the wiki. There are appropriate ways and appropriate places to get your message out; scrawling it all over the wiki is simply vandalism and will not be tolerated. - Tanetris 16:29, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
What you fail to understand is that should SOPA pass, even this wiki could be threatened with shutdown. All it takes is one accusation, no proof required (that's exactly what the bill says). So it very much concerns us here and the word needs to be spread everywhere. By blocking, banning, and censoring me, you are giving Anet a bad name by showing that it supports censorship. If speech were really respected, banning of any kind would almost never occur. Sites like techdirt - a well known and respected tech blog with almost a million subscribers - don't ban or block anyone. And they don't get infested with spam or vandalism either. The commenting community sees to that. You should try that approach sometime instead of silencing those who simply take an approach you disagree with. If you truly agree with me about censorship, get my ban lifted immediately. Otherwise it only shows that you do not and that you fear dissent in any form. What was done on the pages was not vandalism, because the page structure was left intact with no changes made to it. Merely a linked image placed at the top where it would not disrupt the layout of the page. Vandals don't care what they do to a page. I do. That was why it was placed as it was. You might want to think about that before arbitrarily deciding that every mirrored edit is somehow automatically vandalism.
And I see you've extended my ban rather than lifting it. Not living up to what you profess to believe, Tanetris. Any suppression or prevention of speech of any kind is censorship. Freedom of expression means protection of all speech, not just speech you like. I will say again, bans are a tool of the past, a tool of those who don't know how to manage their communities in any other way and have no desire to learn how to do so. They should only be used for things like erasing or hugely altering a page, not for merely adding an image atop a few pages for a day or stating what one thinks regardless of whether some think it an appropriate place to do so. No speech should be blocked or suppressed. If the speech is unreasonable or undesired, the community can address it without the need for bans. That's what good online communities do.
Man, you need to chill out. User Felix Omni Signature.pngelix Omni 21:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
there's this cool color grey, it's somewhere between black and white 21:22, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Putting aside that I haven't extended anything (take a look at Special:Log/block, my last action was the original 3-month ban on your account and initial IP), let me be clear about what I believe, so you can see how my actions are consistent with it (though no doubt you will consider the beliefs inconsistent with each other). First, I believe that SOPA is a bad law that works against creative works, innovation, and quite simply freedom. I think it's wrongly putting more power into the hands of those who already have too much. I think anyone who spends time online would do well to keep themselves informed on what's going on in their federal legislature, and in particular follow the Electronic Frontier Foundation, to whom I regularly donate.

I also believe that all of the above is politics that has no more place on the wiki than pictures of my cat: fine within the confines of one's own userspace, but not appropriate to spam anyone with, let alone dev's talkpages and mainspace. And just to be absolutely clear: unsolicited (no dev asked you for this information) bulk (the same thing posted on multiple pages) electronic (wiki) message (...message) is spam by definition. I believe that spam, no matter how controlled and directed, is destructive to the wiki. I have seen users leave the wiki because of it; most visibly a number of devs for whom it became too much work to try to keep up with it all, but also admins who have gotten burned out just trying to keep the wiki a useful resource and regular users who got fed up having to sift through junk to get to the information they were looking for. Even if one particular incident of spam isn't enough to cause this, spam begets spam: one person posts off-topic, another person sees this and assumes it's okay so they do too, and so on and so forth until what on-topic posts there are becomes lost in the sea. Your oft-touted example of techdirt may very well work completely unmoderated as you say (or may have some quiet filters you are unaware of, I wouldn't know as I don't have the time or interest to look into it), but I can tell you with certainty that it would not work here. If we never removed anything that the person who wrote it didn't want removed, half the wiki would be filled with advertisements for boots, cellphones, weight loss plans, loans, and so forth, along with vitriolic hate spewed at an assortment of both devs and random players I've never heard of, countless 'X wuz here' messages, outright gibberish, pornography, and on and on the list goes... I don't just believe this; I know this because this is what I and others remove from the wiki every single day.

I also believe that your argument that SOPA could potentially get the wiki shut down is, besides irrelevant, specious. For one thing, last I checked, the bill provides only for the blocking of websites that aren't within US jurisdiction for DMCA takedowns to apply, and obviously GWW is based in the US. Besides that, considering the (admittedly nigh-draconian) rules we enforce on copyrighted content, there is no way even the most expensive legal team could make a "reasonable belief" argument hold up in court, and ArenaNet (and more importantly NCSoft) aren't so small that they'd just roll over and take it, meaning anyone with a legal team with half a brain wouldn't try it in the first place, lest they open themselves up to liability. While there are plenty of things to worry about, GWW specifically isn't one.

One final note: while you ascribe all this 'censorship' against you to overzealous admins, please do note that the first two people to remove your comments, Chieftan Alex and Kyx, are not admins; they are simply regular users who correctly noted that your message wasn't appropriate.

I hope this settles your confusion, and that it explains why I will not be removing your block, why we will not be changing the wiki to the 'censorship-free' ideal you imagine, and why further actions of this sort on the wiki in the future will be met with the exact same response: revert and block. If it doesn't explain those three things... Well, they're true anyway. - Tanetris 22:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

When I say not to have any suppression of speech on a place like this, what I mean is no suppression of actual reasoned comments, whatever they may be about. Mindless ads and meaningless drivel like your examples are fine to be purged. Techdirt, for example, uses a pretty effective filter for their site so you almost never see anything like that. But anything close to civilized conversation, no matter what the topic, should be allowed to remain. Also, what you fail to realize about SOPA are many things. First, it WILL target US sites because the wording of the bill is so broad that it can and will be expanded to do so. History has shown time and again that if there is any room in a law for abuse by the powerful, it will happen. It is inevitable. Also, there are no penalties in the bill for false accusations. Not a single one. So there is no disincentive to be accurate in such accusations. What you also don't understand about the bill is that no court would be involved in the shutdown. At all. There is no due process, no requirement of proof. Not under SOPA. Read that again if you didn't get it. So one could file an accusation and get this site or any other shut down, without any court involvement or any proof, if this law passes. 03:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Okay, so when you say unmoderated, you mean moderated but allowed an extremely broad range of topics. That makes sense given both the broader scope of a tech blog, and the vastly different purpose of a wiki talk page from a blog's comment section. And so the example has nothing to do with anything.
Courts aren't involved in the shutdown process, no. The hypothetical court I was referring to gets involved afterwards, when the shut down site's company (Anet/NCSoft) sues the pants off the company that shut them down. The other company is only immune from such repercussions if they can demonstrate a reasonable belief of infringement (a ridiculously low bar, but still a bar), and as I pointed out, any legal team worth its salt is going to realize they can't and therefore not go down that road in the first place. Companies don't like setting themselves up for lawsuits they'll lose, as it turns out. But again, that's irrelevant, because you should be opposing the bill regardless of its potential effect on a simple gaming wiki, and because it doesn't belong on said wiki either way.
PS: Laws generally can't be expanded to include things they explicitly don't include unless another bill is passed. Don't get me wrong, I'm not discounting that that's coming next, but when you make claims that a bill you're opposing does things it doesn't do, that damages your credibility and the credibility of everyone who shares your view. Similar to how spamming your views in places they don't belong damage those credibilities. If you want to advance a cause, you really need to balance getting attention with showing respect to the people you're trying to persuade. Just as a general tip. - Tanetris 05:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Guys, a reminder: Counter-trolling rule one is "revert and ignore", not "have wall of text discussions with banned users". -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 14:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


Please remember to sign your comments. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 01:06, 17 November 2011 (UTC)